That sentence you quoted of his is almost a direct White house talking point. This guy must get his info straight from Sarah Sanders. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Printable View
That sentence you quoted of his is almost a direct White house talking point. This guy must get his info straight from Sarah Sanders. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Which means it probably originated on "Fox and Friends".Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
:)
AFAIC, the main takeaways from the document released by mueller include:
1. roger stone is fcuked. he's going to jail. and might die in jail.
2. who is the congressman who requested and got dirt on his/her opponent from guccifer 2.0? many signs lead to nunes. probably not, but that would be great.
3. the hacks included the extremely sensitive analytic information the clinton campaign had compiled....this information would allow an adversary to directly target undecided voters that the clinton campaign was trying to convince.
4. the door is still slightly open on whether or not votes were changed.
5. the very same day that trump said,
http://youtu.be/N1MbFesSC7M
the russian hacking of clinton's email server began.
buckle up, buttercups........there are many more shoes to drop in this colossal scandal.
:chitown:
former CIA director believes next mueller indictments will include americans
http://youtu.be/MSkzv-zFA3I
stone?
don jr?
jared?
ivanka? (please, please, please, please!)
:chitown:
Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) found an “anomaly on Hillary Clinton’s emails going through their private server, and when they had done the forensic analysis, they found that her emails, every single one except four, over 30,000, were going to an address that was not on the distribution list. The ICIG previously caught problems regarding Clinton’s server that the FBI missed. The bureau didn’t notice that some emails were openly marked classified with a “(C)” when they were sent. (RELATED: FBI Missed Clinton Emails Openly MARKED Classified, Wanted To Conclude Probe Before IG Caught Mistake)
Chuck McCullough — who was appointed by former President Barack Obama — took the unusual step of coming forward publicly to say that he perceived pushback after he began raising the alarm about issues with Clinton’s servers to then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
He said he found it “maddening” that Democrats, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, were underselling the amount of classified information on the server.
McCullough said he “expected to be embraced and protected,” but was instead “chided” by someone on Capitol Hill for failing to consider the “political consequences” of his investigative findings
Frank Rucker along with an IGIC attorney Janette McMillan briefed Strzok about Mrs. Clinton’s 30,000 emails that were going to the private unauthorized server that Strzok was supposed to be investigating
Strzok acknowledged meeting with Rucker.
https://teakdoor.com/attachment.php?a...id=16541&stc=1
FFS, still prattling on about Clinton and her unauthorized private server THAT THE WHOLE FREAKING WORLD KNOWS ABOUT BY NOW.
What document are you talking about? "the Mueller Indictment Against Russian Hackers?" Did they release any false information? Or was it all true but the Democratic party wanted it hidden?Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
That is what I don't get about this whole thing. When the press tells the truth they are protected by the first amendment. If a foreign government like Canada or Ireland told the same truth they would go to jail? So if the Russians had released the information to a news organization like wikileaks that would be protected speech but not if the posted the same information on Facebook?
So apparently dumbass thinks quoting the same bollocks off Gohmert's website will somehow add gravitas.Quote:
Originally Posted by mark45y
Bit fucking thick that boy, eh?
:)
correction...we don't know if it's a sitting member of congress...the indictment says 'candidate for congress'.Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
to date there have been more than 100 criminal charges against 32 people and 3 companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonfly
:chitown:
The indictment does not say anywhere that the Russians effected the election results. Mrs. Clinton has told us over and over that the Director of the FBI effected the election results and caused her to lose the election. (Mrs. Clinton is a trustworthy source as she was almost the President and actually won the popular vote). So, who should did the harm? Russians? No they did not influence the election or the Director of the FBI who did influence the election? Indict James Comey. He did the crime he should do the time. Unless you all think Mrs. Clinton is lying?Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
At the time Clinton didn't have a clue.
And it's well established that the Russians interfered BIGLY in the election. To say their interference on such a scale had no effect is simply foolish.
Whether or not it effected the outcome is impossible to say conclusively but it's fair to say they attempted to and THAT'S the issue.
Forget about clinton FFS, that's history. Look to the now. This is more important.
I sometimes wonder just how dim one needs to be in order to uncritically swallow and regurgitate Trump's Twitter bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by mark45y
Thanks.
investigation of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and any Russian (or other foreign) interference in the election, including exploring any possible links or coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government.Quote:
Originally Posted by raycarey
It is like going on an Easter egg hunt and finding Pizza. Nice as Pizza is - it is not Easter eggs.
What a bunch of gobbledygook. Mark are you flustered? Can you try to write a coherent sentence?Quote:
Originally Posted by mark45y
BTW here is a link to the indictment. It reads like a spy novel;
Read: Mueller indictment against 12 Russian spies for DNC hack
https://www.vox.com/2018/7/13/175688...ment-full-text
Do you mean Clinton? She has told everybody Comey scared off people who were going to vote for her. Comey sandbagged her in October the election was in November.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cujo
I did not know that a link to WP is not allowed here and gets deleted. What's the problem?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.ac0b50794790
The Washington Post on the black list like the RT?
You must not read the news. This was one day ago. Not me bringing it up the worlds press and congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cujo
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...t_hearing.html
Russia Today?Quote:
Originally Posted by Klondyke
Yes, NATO agreed an increase in 2014.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
Now baldy orange cunto is claiming it's because of his visit.
Remarkable piece of fuckwittery to believe that shit.
:chitown:
good summary and who's who of what's happened so far...
Everything you need to know about who’s been charged in the Russia case
The special counsel investigation into Russian meddling in the presidential campaign has produced a sprawling array of criminal charges so far. With so many different facets to the case, it can be tough to keep everything straight. Here’s a guide to who’s been charged, how they’re connected to President Trump, what they’re accused of doing and who’s cooperating with prosecutors.
We'll continue to update this page as the investigation continues.
Everything you need to know about who?s been charged in the Russia case
I think I read it correctly . No one has been charged in what Mueller was supposed to investigate that isQuote:
Originally Posted by uncle junior
Investigation of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and any Russian (or other foreign) interference in the election, including exploring any possible links or coordination between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government. Since the Russians had no effect on the election results it is a moot point.
No one that effected the election was charged with anything? Correct?
what is it that you think "mueller was supposed to investigate", mark?Quote:
Originally Posted by mark45y